Is Summers a Bush Proxy?:
David suggests below that the Harvard vote against Summers is a proxy for a vote against Bush and the political right: "they can't beat Bush, . . . so [they] vote against Summers." It's an interesting theory, but what's the support for it? I recognize that the Summers debate carries considerable ideological overtones; on the political right, for example, Summers is lionized as the traditionalist fighting the PC hordes. But what's the evidence that the Harvard vote reflects the faculty's frustration with American politics as a whole? I don't follow Harvard faculty politics — or any university faculty politics, for that matter — but sometimes a faculty vote is just a faculty vote.